<?php
/**
 * <https://y.st./>
 * Copyright © 2019 Alex Yst <mailto:copyright@y.st>
 * 
 * This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
 * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
 * the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
 * (at your option) any later version.
 * 
 * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
 * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
 * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
 * GNU General Public License for more details.
 * 
 * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
 * along with this program. If not, see <https://www.gnu.org./licenses/>.
**/

$xhtml = array(
	'<{title}>' => 'Shifting funds',
	'takedown' => '2017-11-01',
	'<{body}>' => <<<END
<img src="/img/CC_BY-SA_4.0/y.st./weblog/2019/04/20.jpg" alt="A street sign on a leaning post" class="framed-centred-image" width="800" height="480"/>
<section id="dreams">
	<h2>Dream journal</h2>
	<p>
		I dreamed that my father had telekinetic powers, and used them to assemble a toilet in he back yard.
	</p>
</section>
<section id="drudgery">
	<h2>Drudgery</h2>
	<p>
		The professor acknowledged the presence of my question on the learning journal assignment, but didn&apos;t even attempt to address it.
		It looks like I&apos;m just keeping my submission as-is then.
	</p>
	<p>
		My discussion post for the day:
	</p>
	<blockquote>
		<p>
			You simply state that the partly-committed state comes after the active state in times of success, but what is that state used for?
			You also say that the committed state is when the transaction has completed successfully.
			What is the difference between the committed and partly-committed states?
			Why is a partly-committed state needed?
			(That is, why does the transaction not just move from the active state to the committed state upon success?)
		</p>
	</blockquote>
</section>
<section id="religion">
	<h2>Religion</h2>
	<p>
		The missionaries swapped partners today, so I was visited by one familiar face and one new one.
		They asked me if I&apos;d had any questions on what I&apos;ve read since Thursday, and I didn&apos;t, but I asked about some things in regards to lesson zero.
		This lesson was to focus on the restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ.
		I feel much more able to target what we&apos;re doing now that I know the overall lesson outline, as can postpone questions that&apos;ll only become relevant in later lessons to avoid derailing the conversation to badly.
		Still, by the end of the meeting, I&apos;d managed to derail it anyway, and we didn&apos;t get to the lesson at all.
		And it seems we won&apos;t for a while.
		But more on that in a bit.
	</p>
	<p>
		Anyway, so my two questions focussed on what the &quot;fullness of the gospel&quot; is and whether all the holy books have it, or whether it&apos;s somehow specific to the Book of Mormon.
		My thoughts were that if the Book of Mormon, an incomplete account of alleged history, has the fullness, shouldn&apos;t the bible also have it?
		They can say the Book of Mormon completes the bible, and that the bible isn&apos;t complete, but the Book of Mormon itself isn&apos;t complete either, and has to instead complete the bible.
		Yet the Mormons only talk about the Book of Mormon having this fullness, never the other books.
		To answer the first question, it seems the fullness of the gospel refers to the fact that the book teaches certain principles, principles also taught by the bible.
		As for what books have this fullness, it&apos;s the bible and the Book of Mormon.
		The Pearl of Great Price and Doctrines and Covenants lack the fullness of the gospel.
		Instead, these two books, as the missionaries put it, serve a different purpose.
		While the answer wasn&apos;t what I was expecting, it does address exactly the concern I had about the Book of Mormon being no more complete than the bible, seeing as the bible is meant to be stand-alone, while the Book of Mormon is meant as an add-on to a greater work.
	</p>
	<p>
		Next, they asked me what I&apos;ve learned of &quot;God&quot;, so I replied that I&apos;ve learned enough to know that the question&apos;s ambiguous, as in their religion, there are three gods.
		So they clarified that they were referring to Elohim.
		I replied that I don&apos;t know a whole lot yet, but that I now have the name, and understand that Yahweh isn&apos;t Elohim, but rather Jesus, meaning I&apos;m no longer mis-attributing many things to Elohim.
		And also, I brought up that it seems that Elohim has a creator, as part of what we covered quite a while ago is that Elohim actually has a purpose.
		It&apos;s not the case that he simply is and does according to his own intent, but he instead has a <strong>*purpose*</strong>, not a goal, which sounds like he was created by someone with a goal.
		They clarified, and seem to think it&apos;s a self-assigned purpose.
		In other words, not actually a purpose after all, but a goal.
	</p>
	<p>
		Next, they asked me about how much time, patience, and effort I was willing to sink into finding Jesus.
		I didn&apos;t really understand what they were after, but stated that I was already planning to read all four of their holy books at least twice.
		I told the short story of how I didn&apos;t think I was studying the Book of Mormon properly, went back to the beginning and started over, then found things near the beginning that I was only able to pick up because I&apos;d read other things further on.
		Clearly, two read-throughs of the four books were necessary at a minimum if I&apos;m to catch everything.
		I&apos;m not sure if that was quite the answer that they were looking for, but I certainly do plan to sink a good bit of time and energy into learning their religion.
		They also asked me what I understood about praying for a sign.
		To that, I explained that I keep being told contradictory things about how to do that, so I&apos;m utterly lost as to how a sign is to be sought.
	</p>
	<p>
		The missionaries explained that the Book of Mormon is the keystone of their religion.
		They said without that book, the religion falls apart.
		They made the claim that either the book is true in its entirety or it&apos;s entirely fiction.
		That seems like an odd claim to make.
		I mean, a book can certainly contain facts while also containing utter garbage.
		The two aren&apos;t mutually exclusive.
		But anyway, they say that if the words of the book are in fact true, it means a bunch of other things are true.
		Most of these things are things stated by the book itself, so the logic holds up.
		It&apos;s like saying that if someone that never lies says something, that thing must be the truth.
		Their new plan for me is to try specifically to see if the Book of Mormon is true through prayer.
		If I can prove the Book of Mormon true, it&apos;ll prove the existence of Jesus, as the book says Jesus is real.
		Although, now that i write all that down, it seems rather backwards.
		To prove a book&apos;s contents true, you prove each thing that the book says is true individually.
		You don&apos;t magically prove the book to be honest, then know everything it says to be true.
		But anyway, they want me to pray before and after each chapter I read, asking whether the book&apos;s contents is true.
		That&apos;s simple; that I can do.
		As a side note, as I&apos;m not sure where else to mention it, the missionaries tell me that the purpose of the scriptures is to explain where to receive remission from sins, and to show that prophets across time are all on the same page about what needs to be done.
	</p>
	<p>
		Next, they asked me what I know about ... I don&apos;t quite recall.
		It might have been Jesus, or the atonement, or the fall of mankind ...
		I don&apos;t remember.
		Whatever the case, my explanation was that we were created to be imperfect, but yet we punished for being what we were made to be.
		It&apos;s not possible for us to attain perfection, yet because we don&apos;t measure up to that impossible standard no matter how hard we might try, Elohim has to punish us.
		Punishing us for not achieving the impossible isn&apos;t at all justice, yet it&apos;s framed by the church as somehow just.
		However, Jesus takes on the punishment for our crime of being ourselves, which again, isn&apos;t justice.
		If we deserve forgiveness, we deserve it even without a scapegoat.
		But if we don&apos;t deserve forgiveness, we don&apos;t deserve it even without a scapegoat.
		And then there&apos;s the fact that Jesus did nothing wrong and doesn&apos;t deserve the punishment, so his receiving it also isn&apos;t justice.
		They tried to explain that Adam and Eve&apos;s crime had to happen and we had to fall because yada yada, free will, knowledge of good and evil, contrast, you can&apos;t know good unless you&apos;ve partaken of its opposite, et cetera, but it&apos;s exactly the roadblock we hit before.
		Jesus set up this plan, which Elohim approved of, and this plan required the first people to break a commandment.
		So two contradictory commandments were set up so one necessarily had to be broken.
		So that gave Jesus the excuse to punish the pair for failing to do the impossible, then somehow the excuse to punish the rest of us for Adam and Eve&apos;s fall as well.
		None of this is just or fair in any way, and no good gods would set up such a system.
	</p>
	<p>
		So yeah.
		Once more, discussion of the fall has led to the lessons being derailed.
		When I brought it up, it seemed like the most relevant response I had, but now, we&apos;re turning back away from the lessons.
		Instead, we&apos;re going to study the fall.
		The missionaries don&apos;t have an answer to this mess either though, so we&apos;re all studying on our own, then coming back together to discuss.
		The guess missionary today said they&apos;d study this too, though they won&apos;t see me next time, and the regular missionary said they&apos;d tell their partner about this so they could be on the same page and us and be prepared.
		So probably all four of us are going to be reading up on this.
		I wasn&apos;t sure where they were expecting me to get information on why the fall had to be the way it was, so I just asked if the story was Genesis in the bible.
		It is.
		So I guess I&apos;ll start by reading that.
		This&apos;ll take the place of my Book of Mormon studies for the time being.
		I don&apos;t have time for both at the moment, on top of everything else.
		Reading will be slower too, as reading each chapter will involve two prayers.
		My plan had been to read at least a chapter before each prayer, for a total of two chapters per day, but now it seems we&apos;re allocating both daily prayers to one chapter.
		If I read a second chapter, that&apos;s two more prayers, and a third would be two more.
		And that&apos;s on top of my coursework, day job, and journal.
		This also eliminates any opportunity to work on my scripture-studying at work, as I can&apos;t exactly pray there uninterrupted even on my breaks, and I&apos;d need to fit in not only an entire chapter into a break, but also two prayers into that same break.
		Additionally, I&apos;m supposed to log all my prayers, so more prayers means more logging.
		This definitely slows down the process.
		Which is fine, but means I can&apos;t even try to keep up with my previously-scheduled one book per week plan.
		They also said the Pearl of Great Price has information on it, in the sub-book Moses, so I&apos;ll check that out when time allows.
	</p>
</section>
<section id="prayer">
	<h2>Prayer impressions log</h2>
	<p>
		Closing my meeting with the missionaries, I prayed thanking Jesus for our meeting, then asked that he help us understand his scriptures and in particular the fall of humankind.
		We talked afterwards, so no particular feelings or visions came through.
	</p>
	<p>
		Before reading the first chapter of Genesis, I prayed about whether or not what I was about to read was true.
		I prayed that I was setting aside the Book of Mormon for a bit, and starting back at the beginning; at Genesis.
		I asked that if Jesus or Elohim is really there (I&apos;m not even sure which one I&apos;m supposedly talking to) and this really is the way things went down, that he help me understand that.
		All I saw in my mind in response was my wallet, but empty.
	</p>
	<p>
		Wow.
		The first chapter in Genesis contradicts science on several important aspects.
		So that&apos;s a thing, right off the bat.
		I thought it&apos;d take longer to get into disproving the bible.
		In particular, I prayed about the waters above the sky, which science says don&apos;t exist.
		Unless there&apos;s water outside our galaxy, and probably even outside the boundaries of all observable space, what Genesis tells us simply cannot be true.
		What I saw in my mind after praying was a diagram of the solar system with water beyond the orbital paths.
		I really wanted to read the second chapter after reading that nonsense, but I needed to get to bed and had no time for two more prayers.
	</p>
</section>
<section id="loan">
	<h2>Loan</h2>
	<p>
		A workmate seems to be in a tight spot, and asked me for a \$400 $a[USD] loan.
		I guess they thought I might help because I&apos;m one of the few people that&apos;s actually nice to them.
		So I&apos;ve agreed.
		It kind of puts me in a tight spot, though only virtually.
		I&apos;ve sort of limited what funds I access in an effort to better save money.
		This&apos;ll take all I have in savings within my limited fund, plus a little of what I&apos;d set aside for rent.
		And then I have that upcoming $a[laser] hair removal appointment I&apos;ll need to pay for.
		Of course, if I fail to replenish that money before I need it, I&apos;ll just dip into my main account like I don&apos;t want to do.
		And that&apos;s just the thing.
		My tight spot is only virtual, while theirs is probably real, which is why I should do this.
		Still, it&apos;s a mild annoyance for me.
		I&apos;d saved up for rent and this appointment, and now that money&apos;s not there.
		I shouldn&apos;t&apos;ve splurged and hit up the café the other day.
		I wouldn&apos;t&apos;ve done it if I didn&apos;t think I had all the money I needed for now and was even a little ahead of things.
		This&apos;ll teach me not to go to the café on a whim, I suppose.
	</p>
	<p>
		I save all my quarters as a part of my accessible fund though, my intention being to use them for doing laundry.
		I collect quarters faster than I spend them on laundry though, so I really should thin down.
		It seems I have over sixty dollars in quarters right now, so if I can find a way to convert them to bills without running them through either of my credit union accounts (which would put them into the part of my fund I&apos;m trying to avoid touching), it&apos;d get me back to being able to pay rent without dipping into my savings.
		Then I&apos;ll only have to save up for my $a[laser] appointment.
		Still a difficult feat, but I&apos;ll have a better chance of pulling it off.
		There&apos;s a glitch in the grocery fund system I learned of too, via a mistake I made.
		I withdrew too much money from my bottle-redemption account, and the store actually gave me cash back.
		It was less than a dollar, but I&apos;ll try it with a higher amount tomorrow.
		And if that works, I think I&apos;ll try to withdraw the rest of the fund that way.
		It won&apos;t get me back into the black, but it&apos;ll sure help substantially.
		I just need two things I need to buy, one for the experiment, and one for the full withdrawal.
		If they don&apos;t give back change for the experiment, I&apos;ll need to buy a bunch of groceries to spend the full first amount, which I&apos;ll make ten dollars.
		If it works though, I&apos;ll only need to make two small purchases.
		For the first one, tomorrow, I think I&apos;ll get potatoes.
		I ran out yesterday, and intended to buy more tomorrow anyway.
	</p>
	<p>
		Hmm.
		Maybe I don&apos;t want to risk it just yet.
		Maybe I&apos;ll try no more than ten dollars at a time, just in case I end up having to spend the full withdrawal even after the test goes well.
		It&apos;ll mean I more groceries for now and less money back, I suppose, but it&apos;ll also mean less risk.
		Even if it helps less, it should help substantially.
		Plus, I&apos;ve been meaning to test this exploit further anyway.
	</p>
	<p>
		I guess I have more separate funds than I&apos;d actually accounted for after all.
		I thought I had my savings and the cash I keep accessible.
		I also have my laundry fund and my grocery fund though.
		So that&apos;s four funds.
		Even though I&apos;m in poverty, I have enough money that I&apos;ve been able to separate it into four distinct funds, each with its own purpose.
		I need to keep enough of my quarters on hand to do laundry this week, but once I have the potatoes, I should be set on all the groceries I really need for now.
	</p>
</section>
<section id="schedule">
	<h2>Schedule</h2>
	<p>
		On my first trip home from work, I was thinking about my upcoming appointment for group dietary lessons.
		How was I going to make that work?
		The meeting was to happen at 13:30.
		My guess based on the scraps of information I&apos;ve got is that the meeting lasts an hour and a half.
		That means if I&apos;m right about the intended meeting length and if we get out on time, I&apos;ll be leaving the building just after 15:00.
		And I&apos;ve got to be to work at 16:00.
		I&apos;d need to rush on my bike, and I wouldn&apos;t have time to stop at home to change into my work clothes.
		Even then, I might not make it on time.
		Why didn&apos;t I ask for this day off from work or something!?
	</p>
	<p>
		But then it dawned on me: the meeting&apos;s on a Thursday.
		All the meetings are on Thursdays.
		I don&apos;t work Thursdays.
		Everything was fine.
		And in reality, I actually did request those days off, just not for that reason.
		I requested Thursdays off so I could make it to the $a[EUGLUG] meetings.
	</p>
</section>
<section id="mobile">
	<h2>Mobile</h2>
	<p>
		My mobile kept turning on and playing music in my pocket today.
		People probably thought someone kept calling me or something, though I have <strong>*never once*</strong> used a musical ringtone.
		When I had telephone service, I always used a ringtone that sounded somewhat like a telephone.
		I mean, it wasn&apos;t one of those convincing ones that sounds just like an old land line machine, but it gets the clear idea across that it&apos;s a telephone ring and not a song.
		What I assume was happening, and hope was the case, is that the button kept getting hit, waking the device, then the play button on the lock screen was getting pressed.
		The alternative is that the screen was turning on on it&apos;s own again, allowing the play button to get pressed.
		If that&apos;s the case, the thing&apos;s starting to wig out again, so soon after finally having it functional again.
	</p>
	<p>
		Anyway, with the thing repeatedly going off, I took it out of my pocket and put it on the counter beside the register.
		I ended up forgetting it at work when I left.
		Thankfully, I&apos;d been let off about fifteen minuted early, fifteen minutes before closing time, and when I raced back to work to retrieve it, they were still open.
		Oddly enough, it was three minutes after closing time when I got there, but I guess they were taking it a it slow.
		It worked out well for me.
	</p>
</section>
END
);
